Hi All, I just submitted an application into the contest 2009 about Micro Windows. its actually a library to build windows GUI applications. it support Forms, Buttons, Edit Boxes, Label and List Boxes. My vision was that this project will need to be much evolved. More Graphics can be added, more object, more properties and more events. so i was wondering if any body is interested in continuing the development of the Micro Windows to make a more impressive GUI library.
Re: Any one interested in continuing Micro Windows?
semsem :
Hi All, ... My vision was that this project will need to be much evolved. More Graphics can be added, more object, more properties and more events. so i was wondering if any body is interested in continuing the development of the Micro Windows to make a more impressive GUI library.
Hello Bassem,
Micro Windows is very impressive. Admittely, first I could not recognize that is uses touchscreen, but after I did, I would say that the library is rather comfortable for users.
Why I do not usually do threadjacking, I hope you will not mind if I ask here why the possibilities of gestural input (meaning using values from MEMS sensor) were almost unused in most of the projects submitted.
The problems of touchscreen input are obvious: The screen of Primer2 is not very large, fingers cache the bigger part of it quite often. One may circumvent this by using a stylus, but when taking the gadget outside it is not very convinient.
I think I should rephrase my question to get more input from fellow developers here: What applications would need gestural interface and what gestures would these applications need?
Re: Any one interested in continuing Micro Windows?
>I think I should rephrase my question to get more input from fellow developers here: What >applications would need gestural interface and what gestures would these applications need?
In OSM4Primer2 you can zoom into the map. A gesture like that one is used on the iphone to zoom pictures would be rather cool. But you are right: a gesture using two fingers can´t be done on display small like the one of the primer2.
Re: Any one interested in continuing Micro Windows?
I guess that gestural interface would be fine, but I'm sorry guys, but unlike iPod, the Primer2 does not have a multitouch screen, due to 4 wires resistive technology !
Re: Any one interested in continuing Micro Windows?
Hello all,
yrt :
I guess that gestural interface would be fine, but I'm sorry guys, but unlike iPod, the Primer2 does not have a multitouch screen, due to 4 wires resistive technology !
When speaking about gestural interface I meant full-device gestures, like shaking a device to clear screen or to quit program.
Re: Any one interested in continuing Micro Windows?
Hello,
My oppinion are that both Circle_OS and Micro Windows will do the "same", so it does not make sense for me to start micro windows from circle os, it must "only" be either of them at a time?
Re: Any one interested in continuing Micro Windows?
At the current state i don't think that circle OS and Micro Windows are the same. Circle OS is simply the OS. it provides scheduling and HAL (hardware abstraction layer). Micro windows is just a Library. It makes use of Circle OS and can't replace it.
as for gesture inputs, i have two comments we need to standardize the operations. so for example, a right left shake would mean exit while an up down shake would mean another thing. when standardized people would get used to it faster and no conflicts in the operations. i also think that this should be hidden from user, either by the OS or the Micro Windows (In this case Micro windows should detect the shake and Issue and Exit Shake event for example).
my second comment is about using the mems in the Menu's, when i hold my Stm32 Circle up and steady i found that the active element move down to the bottom of the menu. i think this is wrong. The active item should only move with motion up or down for example. Any body else see's this behaviour?
Re: Any one interested in continuing Micro Windows?
Hello Bassem,
semsem :
... as for gesture inputs, i have two comments we need to standardize the operations. so for example, a right left shake would mean exit while an up down shake would mean another thing. when standardized people would get used to it faster and no conflicts in the operations. i also think that this should be hidden from user, either by the OS or the Micro Windows (In this case Micro windows should detect the shake and Issue and Exit Shake event for example).
Well, the meaning of standardization is clear. Do we need a wiki to proceed to brainstorming about different gestures?
semsem :
my second comment is about using the mems in the Menu's, when i hold my Stm32 Circle up and steady i found that the active element move down to the bottom of the menu. i think this is wrong. The active item should only move with motion up or down for example. Any body else see's this behaviour?
This behaviour is actually the correct one: The "zero" position is the one of 30°.
When I compile the lib project, there will be more errors: the first one is: C:\Program Files\Raisonance\Ride\Lib\ARM\include/stm32f10x_lib.h:2:2: error: #error STM32 library version conflict detected!
Re: Any one interested in continuing Micro Windows?
This project was written with an old SM library (<3.0). So in the project settings, you have to set the field "LD Linker\Libraries\Use OLD Precompiled" to "Yes"
